We have a family project to pool resources and put a family member through a Masters programme in Chemical Engineering . Option is :

1. Nottingham Uni

Do 2 years in Semenyih, 2 yrs in UK
Cost estimate(guesstimate?) - RM 300 k ( inflation ignored)

2. Imperial College

Do 4 years in UK
Cost estimate (guesstimate?) - RM 680 k (inflation ignored)

If we had money to burn, the decision would be so easy. sad.gif Assuming we work out a plan to get the extra RM 380 k, question is :

Is the extra 2 yrs spent in UK and the difference (perveived) in academic training from the 2 instituitions worth the additional RM 380 k?

Would appreciate any feedback..yes, any feedback/opinions,etc (no matter how insignificant it may seem ).Thanks in advance!

This post has been edited by ??!!: Nov 17 2016, 12:32 AM

Do you want to be a chartered engineer or what?

You can do this where you do your bachelor's at nottingham and get a masters from imperial or elsewhere. That way , you save money.

This post has been edited by feynman: Mar 4 2006, 03:35 PM

Say hi to robin hood for me when you reach at nottingham.

In fact, the overwhelming majority of post graduate engineering degrees (MSc) are NOT accredited at all by the professional engineering bodies (IChemE, IMechE, IEEE etc.). Therefore if you pick the BEng/ MSc route, your course is only 3/4 accredited, but as long as the design project criteria is met during your BEng, it shouldn't be too much of a problem.

This post has been edited by elb: Mar 4 2006, 08:10 PM

IMHO, you have a wrong question. If a person is smart enough and deserve to get a Master Degree in Chemical Engineering, s/he would be able to get close to full scholarship to get his/her Master degree in Electrical Engineering. It is fairly common to get scholarship for graduate degree in USA (regardless of whether you are foreign student or not).

Now, if a person is not smart enough, why waste so much money on a Master degree?? Save the money to buy a house for the person.

Sorry for being brutally honest..

Dreamer

i'd personally go for nottingham. imperial is a highly regarded university, and nottingham is slightly less so. it really depends on what u wish to do with the degree. if ur looking to go into investment banking or management consulting, then imperial will gvie a better boost, but otherwise, i dont really see any difference between the two, apart from the workload at imperial being a bigger b**** to handle and suffering the ridiculouus london cost of living.

This post has been edited by WillHung: Mar 4 2006, 08:41 PM

I don't know about the process in Malaysia, but according to the representatives of UOL, one must go through 4 years of engineering studies, 2 years of apprenticeship and another 2 years as a junior engineer before one can become a chartered engineer. This of course is the British system.

True, but chemical engineering at imperial is a popular course and it seems that they have strong industrial links.

I was referring to the UK postgraduate taught masters in engineering at my earlier post by the way.

The requirements for chartered status involve a taught masters; research masters are not counted towards the 4 years of tertiary education required for chartered status to my knowledge. Scholarships for taught masters are rare; why should a (EU) company sponsor £15k for your MSc (that's for tuition fees alone) when they can easily hire a local or European citizen with an MEng qualification (and without the hassel of work permit applications) at little cost?

This post has been edited by elb: Mar 4 2006, 10:47 PM

I need you to elaborate further.....

As far as I know, there are two types of engineering degrees in the UK, 3 or 4 years. Since the British equivalent of BEM is actively involved in the designing and implementation of these courses, the 4 year program acts as a satisfactory requirement for one to be a chartered engineer.

I suppose the taught masters that you were saying is an addition qualification for those with a BEng.

This post has been edited by feynman: Mar 4 2006, 10:57 PM

Basically, to become a chartered engineer in the UK, you need to have: 4 years of the relevant engineering course that is accredited by the professional body (I shall use IChemE and chemical engineering as my example, the professional chemical engineering body in this case, because I am educated as a (bio)chemical engineer and it is also relevant to the thread starter), and three (or was it four?) years of work experience (and needing to pass the qualification exams of course).

The four years is usually done via the 4 year MEng route; where you qualify with an undergraduate Masters in Engineering. Make sure that the course is accredited with the IChemE. The other option is to take a three year accredited BEng, followed by a TAUGHT MSc (a research MSc is NOT valid to my recollection) in the field of chemical engineering.

Your four years of study in this case would be only ¾ of the official requirement; however you can argue that you have done the majority of the stipulated requirement accredited (with the MSc year related to chemical engineering), and that you have done the design project (a VERY important component where you MUST be able to display teamwork and individual qualities) without which you CANNOT become chartered) whilst doing your BEng.

What is the difference between the BEng / MSc and MEng route, you might ask? The content. The MEng route is built around 4 years and is relatively rigid to meet the requirements of becoming a professional engineer. Same with the BEng, but for only 3 years in this case. Many universities have phased out the BEng, and in general the BEng is more popular amongst international students than the locals (because you pay so much for the one year difference, basically).

The MSc is targeted mainly at working people who are looking to expand their knowledge, or people from different fields (I know biochemists and chemists who are pursuing their MSc in chemical engineering) looking for a fresh change. People looking to get into better universities from a lower ranked university (i.e. Nottingham to Imperial) also apply here.

In general, they do not have the sufficient engineering knowledge imparted into them, and they will not be able to cope with (accredited) Masters level chemical engineering modules such as Advanced Reactor Design, Bioreactor Engineering II etc (these units vary from university to university) especially if they come from different fields.

Therefore they would also not be able to carry out the important design project, and module choices are very flexible (you can pick between many elective units such as those which are offered in the accredited 3rd year of MEng, or more specialised areas of chemical engineering such as structured product engineering etc., or even modules from different departments, such as Chaos Theory & Dynamic Systems from the Physics Department). It is for these reasons that MSc degrees are NOT accredited.

The only IChemE accredited MSc in chemical engineering in the UK is offered at UMIST if I am not mistaken, and that is in the area of chemical engineering design (yes, you get to do a design project).

For the work experience part, you need to be working in the field of chemical engineering, and placed under the mentoring of an (already) chartered engineer. Therefore if you work as an engineer in a small company with non-chartered engieneers (or God forbid, the only engineer amongst technicians), your work experience does not count. They will continually assess you and before you get the title of chartered engineer (CEng), you will need to sit for an assessment exam (whether or not you need to sit for the occasional exam every year/ half a year, or once while you try to obtain a CEng, I have no idea).
If you choose to do an industrial placement year during your course, this year counts towards the working experience requirement.

The BEM recognizes whatever the ECUK recognizes, which I find to be highly annoying. Can someone tell me the BEM requirements for Malaysian university graduates? Is it the 4 year Bachelor course for academic requirements? Because I have a great deal of bones to pick, namely that a year or two is wasted on teaching GENERAL engineering courses of no relevance (that's my understanding anyway), and that (I believe anyway) a 3 year UK BEng is worth more weight than a 4 year Bachelor's in Malaysia.

Phew. That was a lot to type, and I wonder if I should have created a topic on its own to create more awareness.

This post has been edited by elb: Mar 5 2006, 07:43 AM

yes.

It's a 4+2+2 then.

It is up to you. At the end of your study you will get a same degree paper. Just Imperial C will gurantee you a better job opportunity. It don't make any diff for you.

i'm not too sure on the 4 + 2 + 2, I think it was 4 + 3 to be more precise.

This post has been edited by elb: Mar 5 2006, 10:48 AM

You might get the same degree paper, but what you learn under both universities would be different in content and depth.

It is......that's what UOL said.

aye my bad, I just checked IChemE, and they say four.

http://www.getchartered.org/how_do_i_chartered.htm

Couldn't earlier because I was having difficulty connecting online

Qualifications aside, Imperial is a VERY good place to study. The quality of education you get is on par with Oxbridge I'd say. Nottingham U on the other hand has an excellent campus, and students studying there is guranteed a great time.

Going to uni isn't just about that piece of paper you get at the end of the course, but the experience you gain through the journey.

Either route, that person you're sponsering is one lucky git!

Can the person makes enough money in future to justify RM680K??? You could do a lot with your life with that kind of money.

Dreamer

It is possible........